The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
STATES OF JERSEY
PLÉMONT HOLIDAY VILLAGE SITE: NEGOTIATIONS FOR PURCHASE
Lodged au Greffe on 29th September 2008 by the Connétable of St. Ouen
STATES GREFFE
PROPOSITION
THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion
to re q uest the Minister for Treasury and Resources –
(a ) to open negotiations with the current owners of the Plémont Holiday Village site, St. Ouen with a
view to ascertaining their willingness to sell the site and, if appropriate, determining an agreed value for it; and
(b ) to present the outcome of the negotiations to the States to enable members to decide what further
action, if any, they may choose to take.
CONNÉTABLE OF ST. OUEN
REPORT
Following my proposition P.112/2006, where the States decided that they were of the opinion –
"(a) to agree that it would be in the public interest for the headland at Plémont, as shown in Drawing
Number 150/06/101, namely the site formerly occupied by Plémont (Pontins) Holiday Village complex and the surrounding associated land, to be preserved as open space for the enjoyment of the public of the Island;
(b) to request the Council of Ministers to consider all options to preserve the land described in paragraph (a) and to recommend a preferred option to the states with the least possible delay;",
nothing appears to have happened.
I am aware that initially, following the 2006 decision, the Council of Ministers put off any decision until the Minister for Planning and Environment had determined the application which was relevant at the time.
On the 16th January 2007, Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier asked questions of both the Planning and Environment Minister and the Chief Minister. To the question asked of the Chief Minister, Senator Walker replied that a report on the Plémont headland was to be considered by the Council Ministers on the 25th January 2007, and to a further question, the Chief Minister replied that the details of that report would be reported to members of the States.
The Minister for Planning and Environment refused the application in June, 2008.
On the 1st July 2008, Senator L. Norman asked the Minister for Planning and Environment, in view of the fact that the application had been refused, what action he was going to be taking to comply with the wishes and decision of the States. The Minister for Planning and Environment replied that there was no action he could take personally, but stressed that the matter needed to be brought to a conclusion, and that, in his opinion, the site would be best in the hands of the public, used for the benefit of the public, and returned to nature.
On the 15th July 2008, the Chief Minister, in response to a question from Senator L. Norman, seeking a date when a preferred option would be presented to the States, in accordance with the States decision of 2006, said that he would undertake to bring the information and options to the House at the earliest opportunity.
Again on 16th September 2008, the Chief Minister, in reply to a further question from Senator L. Norman, inferred that no action was imminent. I therefore bring this proposition before the House in an attempt to proceed this matter, firstly by identifying a possible valuation of the site, and then bringing the matter before the Members of this House so that, being better informed, they may consider any further action.
Financial and manpower implication
There does not appear to be any financial or manpower implication associated with this proposition.